
Bnnk '15 L/ 



SPEECH 

I- 



OF 



R. "^INGHAM, OF MICHIGAN, 



ON THE 



ADMISSION OF CALIPOENIA. 



n,5jJ--':'^ 



DELIVERED 



fi^ 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JUNE 4, 1850. 



WASHINGTON : 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL'' GLOBE OFFICE. 

1850 



THE SLAVEllY UUESTION. 



Mr. BINGHAM said : 

Mr. Chairman, two years ago I took occasion to express in this Hall 
my opinion of the constitutionality and expediency of applying the pro- 
visions of the JefFersonian ordinance to the territories recently acquired 
from Mexico. I stated my belief that slaveiy was a great moral and 
political evil ; that it was an element of weakness wherever it existed ; 
that it was a hindrance to the growth and prosperity of a State ; that it 
was wholly incompatible with that degree of intelligence which makes 
labor either respectable or profitable, and that it was our duty to pro- 
tect these new and feeble territories thrown upon our care, from its 
dangerous and threatened encroachments. I propose "to take no step 
backward now." I have seen no reason to change my opinion. 
The vindication of slavery by its able champions on this floor, has given 
no attractions to its features, or rendered them any less odious to my 
view. The argument to support the right to carry slaves into the terri- 
tories and colonize them, under the Constitution, has proved entirely un- 
satisfactory ; for I regard it as exclusively a State institution, protected 
solely and only by the laws of the State, and no more susceptible of being 
transferred to the territories and protected by the United States Govern- 
ment, than is the common-school s\'stem or the banking" system of the 
State of Michigan. 

Mr. Chairman, in the earlier and better days of this Republic, slavery 
was everywhere, North and South, execrated and denounced as an evil 
and a curse. Its introduction into this country was made the subject of 
earnest protest, and its emancipation was regarded as an object which 
would be accomplished at an early day after the close .of the Revolution, 
and as both desirable and proper. Some weeks since, an honorable gen- 
tleman from Ohio, [Mr. Campbell,] and more recently, an honorable 
gentleman from Maine [Mr. Gerry] introduced to the notice of southern 
gentlemen, for the purpose of refreshing their recollection, the opinions of 
their ancestors. For the purpose of my argument, I shall repeat a few 
of those precious extracts. In an able exposition of the rights of British 
America, and laid before the convention of Virginia, which assembled in 
August, 1774, lor the purpose of appointing delegates to the proposed 
Congress, drawn by Thomas JefTerson, is the following extract: 

" Tht abolition of domestic slavery is the greatest object of desire in these colonies; where 
it was unhappily introduced in their infant state. But, previous to the enfranchisement of the 



slaves, it IS necessary to exclude furtlier importations from Africa. Yet our repeated attempts 
to ertect this by prohibitions, and by imposing duties wliich might amount to prohibition, have 
been hitherto defeated]byhis iVIiijesty's nesative; thus preferring the immediate advantage of a 
few African corsairs to the lasting interests of the American States, and the rights of human' 
nature, deeply wounded by this infamous practice." — ^m. Jlrchives, itk series, vol. 1, jj. 696. 

The Congre.^s of Darien, in the colony of Georgia, passed the fol- 
lowing preamble to a series of resolutions: 

*' We, the representatives of the extensive district of Darien, in the colony of Georgia, being 
now assembled in Congress, by the authority and free choice of the inhabitants of said district, 
now freed from their fetters, do resolve." 

Then follow several resolutions setting forth the grounds of complaint 
against the oppressions of Great Britain, closing with the emphatic 
declaration which I will now read : 

" To show to the world tliat we are not influenced by any contracted or interested motives, 
but by a general philanthropy for all mankind, of whatever climate, language, or complexion, 
we hereby declare our disapprobation and abhorrence of the unnatural practice of slavery in 
America, (however the uncukivated state of our country or other specious arguments may plead 
for it) — a practice founded in injufsiice and cruelty, and highly dangerous to our liberties as well 
as lives, debasing pait of our fellow-creatures below men, and corrupting the virtue and morals of 
the rest, and layini: the basis of that liberty we contend for, and which we pray the Almighty to 
continue to the latest posterity, upon a very wrong foundation. We therefore resolve at all 
times to use our utmost endeavors for the manumission of our slaves in this colony, upon the most 
safe and equitable footing for the masters and themselves." — Jim. Jlrchives, Mh series, vol. l,p. 
1135. 

In front of the State-House, Philadelphia, was proclaimed the fol- 
lowing sentiments : 

" JVe hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed 
with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." 
— Declaration in Congress, July 4, 177G. Thomas .Jefferson. 

George Washington, in a letter to Robert Morris, dated Mount Vernon, 
April 12th, 1786, said: 

"I can only say, there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan 
adopted for the abolition of it, (slavery;) but there is only one proper and effectual mode in 
which it can be accomplished, and tliat is by legislative authority; and this, so far aa my suf- 
frage will go, shall never be wanting." — Sparks's IVaskington, 156. 

Again, in a letter to John F. Mercer, dated September 9, 17S6, he 
said: 

"I never mean, unless snme particular circumstances should compel me to it, to possess 
another slave by purchase, it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted by which 
slavery in this country may be abolished by law." 

In his Notes on Virginia, Mr. Jefterson says : 

" I think a change already perceptible since the origin of our present R.evolution. The spirit 
of the master is abating — that of the slave is rising from the dust, his condition mollifying, and 
the way, I hope, preparing, under the auspices of Heaven, for a total emancipation." 

Again, Mr. Jefferson says : 

"Nobody wishes more ardently than I to see an abolition, not only of the trade, but the con- 
dition of slavery, and certainly nobody will be more willing to encounter any sacrifice for that 
object." 

In tlie Convention which formed our Constitution, Mr. Madison said : 

" I think it wrong to admit the idea, in the Constitution, that there can be property in man." 

The suggestion of Mr. Madison was adopted, and so zealous were 
the framers of that instrument to prevent even a color of approbation 
for the long continuance of the institution, that not even the term slave 
was allowed to find its way into the Constitution. 

In the Convention of the State of North Carohna, when the question 
of the adoption of our Federal Constitution was under consideration, Mr. 
Iredell, of that State, said : 



•' When the entire abolition of slavery takes place, it will be an event which must be pleasing 
to every generous mind and every friend of human nature." 

Mr. Parker, who was a member of the first Congress under the Con- 
stitution, from Virginia, during a discussion in relation to that pro\'ision 
of the Constitution inhibiting the slave trade, held the following language : 

" He hoped Congress would do all in their power to restore to human nature its inherent 
privileges, and, if possible, wipe off the stigma which America labored under." 

Mr. Mason, of Virginia, while the same provision was under consid- 
eration in the Federal Convention that formed the Constitution, said: 

" The present question concerns not the importing States alone, but the whole Union. The 
evil of having slaves was experienced duiing the late war. Had slaves been treated as they 
might have been by the enemy, they would have proved dangerous instruments in their liands." 

Again, on the same occasion, after having said many things which, if 
repeated now by any gentleman from the free States, w^ould, in the opin- 
ion of gentlemen from the South, entitle him to the sobriquet of " Abo- 
litionist," spoke as follows: 

*' He held it essential, in every point of view, that the General Government should have power 
to prevent the increase of slavery-" 

The institution of slaveiy at the period referred to, was regarded with 
so much hostihty by the leading men in all parts of the country, that the 
committee who drafted and reported the Declaration of Independence, 
felt constrained to, and did assign the fact, that the British King had by 
his acts fastened it upon the Colonies, as one of the grievances which 
justified separation. The ordinance of '87, in these words — "there shall 
be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude therein, except for the pun- 
ishment of crime of which the party shall have been duly convicted" — 
received the support of every southern man. Mr. Leigh, in the Conven- 
tion of Virginia, in 1S32, said: 

"1 thought till very lately, that it was known to everybody, that during the Revolution, and 
for many years after, the abolition of slavery was a favorite topic witli many of our al)lest states- 
men, who enteitained with rfcspect all the schemes which wisdom or ingenuity could suggest 
for its accomplishment." 

These short extracts, Mr. Chairman, disclose the true sentiments of 
southern statesmen, and exhibit the feehngs which pervaded the southern 
States at the time, and soon after the close of the Revolution, which 
gave us a name and a rank among the nations of the earth. Freedom, 
liberty, emancipation, was the great idea. But, Mr. Chairman, a change 
has come over the spirit of the South. One after another the found- 
ers of the nation have passed away ; a new generation has suc- 
ceeded them. A hfe of luxurious indolence is entirely inconsistent 
with emancipation. It is easier to appropriate the proceeds of the labor 
of others than to earn, by honest industry ; and labor, once honorable, 
has become degraded, for who would be the yoke-fellow of the slave ? 
New slave States have been added to the Confederacy, and new terri- 
tory acquired, political power has thereby been obtained, and ambi- 
tion ha.s been gratified. The Senator from Massachusetts attributes this 
sudden change — by which, instead of considering slaveiy "an evil, a 
bhglit, a blast, a mildew, a scourge, and a curse, it has become a cher- 
ished institution; no evil, no scourge, but a great religious, social, and 
moral blessing — to the sudden uprising and rapid growth of the cotton 
plantations of the South." Whatever the cause may be, it is certain 
that the change has taken place ; and for the purpose of letting my con- 



stituents see whnt the sentiments of members of this House are, I append 
a few extracts from their speeches, delivered the present session : 

" It haa been said that slavery is a 'doomed institution;' and so 1 believe—' doomed' to exist 
forever. It is one of the oldest institutions among men. In every ae;e, in every clime,_ 
it has been practiced and sanctioned by mankind, whether acting upon the light of nature or of 
revelation. Indeed, among men, Christianity itselfhas notso many evidences in its favor — a small 
part of mankind have been Christians, while the practice of slavery has been universal. Solon 
and Lycurgus are known to us by the fame of their legislation: they made no laws against 
slavery. Greece and Rome, the most distinguished and civilized of ancient nations, were slave- 
holders. Our Constitution, the work of our fathers, recognizes it. Our Saviour stood upon the 
world amid slaves, where the master had power over the life of the servant— he did not rebuke 
it or denounce it as a crime. And I trust that I will be pardoned for resting my conscience 
upon these high authorities, and for declining to commit it to the keeping of these modern free- 
soil saints, who have so much trouble in keeping their own. — {Speech of Hon. J. H. Savage, of 
Tennessee, May 13." 

But, sir, slavery is not only justified, but it is claimed that it was the 
design of the fraraers of the Constitution to extend and perpetuate it. 
I will read another extract: 

"To extend the institution indefinitely, it [the Constitution] prohibited the passa£;e of any law 
to stop the importation of slaves from Africa, and elsewhere, prior to the year 1808. Another 
clause, with a view to its perpetuation forever, provides for the recapture of fugitives who escape 
to non-slaveholding Stales. Notwithstanding these plain stipulations between the slaveholding 
and non-slaveholding States, constituting the essential, vital provisions of the Constitution, with- 
out which all admit the Confederation could not have been formed, we are cantingly told that 
' slavery is a sin, and the North is opposed to its extension.' 'We, the philanthropists of 
this day, are better than tlie sages and heroes, purified by the trials of the Revolution, and 
covered with its glories, who assemiiled in the old hall of the Confederation in 1787.' I have no 
reply to make to these pharisaical pretensions; they are beneath contempt. I am content with 
tke religion of the Bible, and the Constitution of our fathers, uncorrupted by the comments of 
the pseudo moralists and statesmen who now shed their coruscations upon us. I shall certainly 
not condescend to reply to the puling sojdiistry upon this subject, so often heard in this House. 
Were 1 disposed to argue the question of slavery, without reference to the Constitution, in alt 
its relations, religious,"moral, social, and poliiir'al, no fear of its successful vindication would 
restrain me. It wou'd seem to be profanation to call an institution of society irreligious or im- 
moral, which is expressly and repeatedly'sanctioned by the word of God; which existed in the 
tents of the patriarchs; and in the households of His own chosen people." — Speech of lion. 
Mr. Inge, of .Alabama. 

An honorable gentleman from Mississip})i, [Mr. Featherston,] says, 

" That slavery is the natural, the proper condition of the African — one that is advantageous 
to his master, and a great blessing to him." 

An honorable gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Bocock,] from the land of 
Washington and Jefferson, says: 

" It is now asserted that slavery is '« moral evil,' in other words, a sin, and consequently that 
those who hold slaves, are guilty therefor. Sir, when I look to those enduring piecepts of 
moral conduct which, mocking all change, and defying all flight of years, shall be made more 
and more illustrious as eternal ages shall crown them with the fruits of their happy influence, I 
see slavery there tolerated, 1 had almost said inculcated. * * * Satisfied ourselves that there 
is no imnioralily in it, we have a very slight opinion of those who are so egregiously wounded in 
conscience for us. " 

And the honorable gentleman from Mississippi [IMr. Brown] says: 

"You think that slavery is a great evil. Very well, think so; but keep your thoughts to your- 
selves. For myself, ! regard slavery as a great moral, social, and religious blessing — a blessing 
to the slave, and a blessing to his master." 

An honorable gentleman from Alabama, [Mr. Alston,] in reply to 
an honorable member from New York, who had stated that the South 
acknowledged the si?i and evil of the institution, and yet sought to extend 
that evil to others, said, "that tlie South entertained no such opinions," 
and added, "We are told by St. Paul that if there had been no law, 
there would have been no sin ; — then sin must be a violation of divine 
law; and I shall proceed to show that slavery is not a violation of that 
law, and therefere no sin." The remainder of his hour was devoted to 



the proof that slavery was a divine institution, estabhshed by the law of 
God ; that the public wealth and happiness were promoted by it, and 
that it was our duty to perpetuate and extend it. I leave the question 
of its origin, Mr. Chairman, to be settled by theologians ; with that I 
have, at present, nothing to do; my only object in making these quota- 
tions is to show, that while the statesmen and people of the Noilli have 
consistently and uniformly regarded slaveiy as an evil, that the sen- 
timent and action of the South has undergone a change, and that from 
a unanimous desire which they once entertained to restrict its limits, 
and to gradually but finally exterminate it from the land, they have 
put forth their mightiest efforts to strengthen, extend, and perpetuate it. 
This desire on the part of southern statesmen was first exhibited in the 
celebrated Missouri controversy. They were unwilling to relinquish a 
single acre of that immense Louisiana purchase from the grasp of the 
slave power. Then, as now, the stability of the Union was menaced, 
and the North was taunted with the threat of a southern confederacy; 
but in the settlement of the controversy, a southern President, with a 
southern Cabinet, of which Mr. Calhoun was one, distinctly acknowl- 
edged the power of Congress over slaveiy in the territories. The same 
spirit was manifested in the Florida purchase. But it was never so 
boldly and shamelessly exhibited as in the negotiations for the annexa- 
tion of Texas. I propose, Mr. Chairman, to make some quotations from 
the celebrated correspondence which preceded the treaty, under Mr. 
Tyler's administration, that my constituents may see the motive which 
prompted southern statesmen to enter into that negotiation, and also to 
convince them of the propriety, nay absolute necessity, of ingrafting the 
anti-slaveiy restriction into the two and three milhon bills which after- 
wards proposed the acquisitioH of Mexican territoiy, and into territorial 
governments now that the country is acquired. These negotiations were 
based upon the assumption that the British Government was exerting its 
influence to obtain from Mexico the recognition of Texan independence, 
a condition of which was, that slaveiy was to be abolished in Texas, 
This excited in the minds of the southern slaveholders in the Cabinet 
the greatest alarm, and the powers of the Government were put forth to 
prevent it. In a dis})atch to Mr. IMurphy, the Secretary of State, Mr. 
Upshur says : 

"A movement of this sort cannot be contemplated by us in silence. Such an attempt upon 
any neighboring country would necessarily he. viewed by this Government with very deep 
concern, but where it is made upon a nation whose territories join the slaveholdins; Slates of our 
Union, it awakens a still more solemn interest. It cannot be permitted to succeed without the 
most strenuous efforts on our part to arrest a calamity so serious to every part of the country." 

Again lie says: 

" But there is another view of this subject still more important to us, and scarcely less import- 
ant to Texas herself. The establishment, in the very midst of our slaveholding States, of an 
independent government, forbidding the existence of slavery, and by a people born, for the most 
part, among us, reared up in our habits, and speaking our language, could not fail to produce 
the most unhappy eiTects upon both parties. If Texas were in that condition, her territory 
would afford a ready refuge for the fugitive slaves of Louisiana and Arkansas, and would hold 
out to them an encouragement to run away, which no municipal regulations of those Slates could 
possibly counteract." 

Again, in another dispatch, he says : 

"There is no reason to fear that there will be any difference of opinion among the people of 
the slaveholding Stales; and there is a large number in the non-slaveholding States, with views 
sufficknlly liberal to embrace a policy absolutely necessary to the saivalion of the South, although, 
in some respects, objectionable to themselves." 



8 

In another dispatch, m which he is speaking of Texas remaining an 
independent government, and of its being peopled by emigrants from 
Europe, he says: 

" But the first measure of the new emigrants, as soon as they shall have sufficient strength, will 
be to destroy that great domestic institution upon which so much of the prosperity of our southern 
country depends. 

" 1 will only add, that if Texas should not be attached to the United States, she could not 
maintain that institution ten years — and probably not half that time." 

Mr. Calhoun succeeded in the Department of State, and in his first 
letter to Mr. Packenham, the British Minister, taking up the correspond- 
ence where it was left by the untimely death of Mr. Upshar, after a 
detailed statement of the histoiy and condition of slavery in the United 
States, he says : 

"That what is called slavery is, in reality, a political institution, essential to the peace* 
safety, and prosperity of those States of the Union in which it exists." 

And, after the treaty v;^as concluded, in a dispatch communicating the 
fact to the Mexican Government, he assigns as a reason for annexation — 

"That the step was forced on the Government of the United States, in self-defence, in con- 
sequence of the policy ado|Hfd by Great Britain in reference to the abolition of slavery in 
Texas. It was impossible for the United States to witness with indifference the efforts to abolish 
slavery there." * * * " And that, if accomplished, it would lead to a state of things danger- 
ous in the extreme to the adjacent States, and the Union itself." 

These extracts, Mr. Chairman, from a voluminous correspondence 
carried on in secret — all knowledge of which ^vas entirely excluded from 
the American people, and v/hich never saw the light of day until the veil of 
secrecy was removed after the rejection of the treaty — are sufficient, I 
trast, to establish the fact that the southern slaveholders desired the 
annexation of Texas, principally for the purpose of strengthening and 
perpetuating slaveiy. 

These reasons for the annexntion of Texas were exclusively southern 
reasons ; but to the North, a different language was held ; and the Hon. 
Mr. Walker, late Secretary of the Treasury, in a public letter, exten- 
sively circulated at the North, after stating elaborately the public benefits 
which.would be gained by annexation, thus refers to slavery : 

" The question is asked, ' Is slavery never to disappear from the Union.'' Tliis is a startling 
and monipntous question; but the answer is easy, and the proif is clear. It ivill ccrlainly dis- 
appear if Texas is reannextd to the Union — not by abolition — but slowly and gradually, by ' diffu- 
sion,' as it has thus already nearly receded from several of the more northern of the slaveholdmg 
States; and as it will continue thus more rapidly to recede by the reannexation of Texas, and, 
finally, in the distaat future, v/ithout a shock, without abolition, without a convulsion, disappear 
into and through Texas into Mexico and Central and Southern America." 

This plausible tlieoiy, which was also presented in a speech by Mr. 
Buchanan, in the United States Senate, was intended " exclusively for 
the northern eye." The entire negotiation, and the correspondence, were 
known only to southern men, and conducted exclusively by them. The 
pubMc never would have seen it, if, long after, a majority of the Senate 
had not removed the injunction of secrecy. Indeed, sir, I believe that 
nearly every man who voted for the treaty, strenuously opposed and 
voted against the pubhcation of the correspondence. Texas was 
annexed. The people of the North who supported it, were governed, I 
trust, liy motives far higher, and far more worthy, than any which related 
to the question of slavery. The joint resolutions which passed both 
Houses of Congress, contained an alternative, which was dictated by 
the wisdom of Mr. Benton, and which was intended to avoid any mis- 
understanding or coUision with Mexico, and to the adoption of which, 



9 

the faith of the outgoing and incoming Administrations were solemnly- 
pledged. That pledge was broken, and we were soon hurried into a 
war. I do not say that that was an unjustifiable war. I have no desire 
to condemn it, much less to detract from the well-earned fune of the 
brave men who fought and won the l>attlcs — conferring imperishable 
renown upon their country. I think it might have been avoided. 
But I ask any dispassionate man to look at this matter honestly, 
and say, if he can, that the acquisition of additional territory, wliifdi 
was contemplated at the beginning, was not intended to be made 
^lave tcrritorij, and to strengthen tlie sla.ve power? Why the pre- 
cipitate, not to say dishonorable, abandonment of that "clear and 
unquestionable" title to Oregon, which was asserted in the Baltimore 
Convention, which was coupled with Texas throughout the campaign; 
and which was repeated in the inaugural address? Would not the same 
objections apply to a free border State beyond Texas, which were urged 
with so much zeal in fivor of annexation? Do we not daily hear them 
urged now? Why, sir, this very thing was foretold with the precision 
of prophec}^ An honorable Senator from New Jersey, [Mr. Dayton,] 
in the debate upon the annexation of Texas, used the following language : 

" Can we believe, for an instant, that the South will be contented with the Rio Grande? No, 
sir; no, sir. As certainly as when the time shall come when she has filled up this wide area, 
the South will agam demand extension at our hands. Sir, if this country hold ttH^ether, I put 
this prophecy on record — I stake my reput;ition with posterity — that our southern States will 
walk with us step by s'ep, and side by side, to the Pacific ocean." 

Sir, I know not what conclusions others may arrive at, but my own 
convictions are clear, that the Wilmot proviso was both expedient and 
proper, and that the northern man who preferred freedom to slaveiy, 
would have proved recreant to the high trust conferred upon him — recre- 
ant to the cause of civil liberty — recreant to the rights and interests of 
the free labor of the North — if he had failed to vote for it and sustain it. 
vSir, what is this "Wilmot proviso," which has been stigmatized by eveiy 
opprobrious epithet, which has been denounced as an " abolition scheme," 
as "a vile abstraction," a "firebrand of discord" — which the Dcmncratic 
editor of the Pemwjlvama7i characterizes as the invention of some "witty 
and cunning pohtical juggler" — which the editor of the Union denomi- 
nates a " pestilent heresy ?" Sir, it is nothing more nor less than the prop- 
osition of the noble Virginian, apphed in 1787, to the country I hav^e, in 
part, the honor to represent, and by which it was declared, that " there 
shall he neither slaverij nor invoJuntanj servitude, otherwise than for the 
imnishment of crimes" Sir, the five great States northwest of the Ohio, 
with their milhons of people, with their teeming cities, their thriving 
villages, with thousands of happy homes — made happy by the industiy 
of prosperous freemen — with their churches, and colleges, and schools, 
with all the elements of present wealth and future greatness, owe a debt 
of gratitude to the memory of Thomas Jefferson, for that honored and 
celebrated '■'■'proviso," which will stand in the und\' ing records of his fame, 
second only to that of the Declaration of Independence. 

Mr. Chairman, we are bound by the obligations of justice and good 
faith, to protect these feeble territories, conquered by our arms, from the 
encroachments of slaveiy. What was the nature of the proclamation 
furnished by Mr. Polk, through die War Department, to General Taylor, 
and published to the people of New Mexico? 



10 

" We come to make no war upon the people of Mexico, nor upon any form of free govern- 
ment they may choose to select for themselves." 

This was the language of General Taylor's proclamation. Did the 
people there select "a;iy fonn of free government f^^ Sir, in a petition pre- 
sented to the- United States Senate, from the people of New Mexico, 
assembled in convention, is this declaration : 

" We do not desire to have domestic slavery within our borders; and until the lime shall arrive for 
our adnmsion into the Union as a State, we desire to be protected by Congress against its introduction 
among us." 

And yet, sir, with this cry for protection coming up from th(? people, 
Congress hesitates and falters about fulfilling the solemn, phghted fldth 
of the Government ! Similar orders were issued to General Kearny. 
I quote from the letter of the Secretary of War : 

"You may assure the people of those provinces [California and New Mexico] that it is the 
wish and design of die United States to provide for them a free government, similar to that which 
exists in our territories." 

Sir, is slaveiy a necessary element of a free government? They were 
promised a government similar to that which existed in our territories ; 
and the only government existing in our territories at that time — that of 
Wisconsin — was entirely free, and shielded by the provisions of the ordi- 
nance of 1787. Shall our first act towards these people, who have sub- 
mitted to our arms, and placed themselves under our protection, be a 
breach of plighted faith? When this weak and defenceless people lift 
up their hands and pray to be ''jirotectcd against the introduction of slavery 
amongst tliem,'" shall we present ourselves to the world in the attitude of 
disregarding our pledges, and tell them their prayer is insolent ? Shall we 

" Keep the word of promise to the ear 
And break it to the hoper" 

God forbid! — Again, Mr. Chairinan, we are told that this is "an 
impracticable and barren proviso,''^ that it is "«?i abstraction," and entirely 
" unnecessary," and that slavery is " excluded by the law of nature, of physi- 
cal geography, the law of the formation of the earth:' Sir, if there is. 
an intelligent man in the district I have the honor to represent, wlio does 
not know that this is a weak invention of the abettors of slavery propa- 
gandism' calculated exclusively for the meridian of the North, intended 
to lull the friends of free labor into a false security, while their rights and 
their interests are betrayed, — if there is a single man, I repeat, who 
beheves that this country has "6ecw brought to an alarming crisis" by a 
protracted struggle of four years for a "mere abstraction,'''' I will tell him 
what the opinions entertained by southern men are who oppose this 
slavery restriction. I read from the speech of Mr. Seddon, of Virginia : 

" We of the South, Mr. Speaker, are not struggling against a name, nor are we to be deluded 
by shadows. We are claiming a substance and a re.ility. We demand fair participation in our 
common acquisitions, or at least equal opportunity of enjoying them. I know some think the 
nature of these countries and the necessities of their clime and productions must exclude slavery. 
So do not I. In all new countries where labor is dear, and domestic servants particularly are 
not to be obtained, if lav/ allows, the conveniences and desires of men will, in my opinion, 
demand slaves, [n mining operations they would confessedly be most valuable; and at this very 
moment, did the South enjoy her rights, her whole slave property would already liave felt the 
appreciation cf a large demand for emigration to California. 

" All sensible men know that, in relation to California, the agitjition and threat of the Wilmot 
proviso has been very nearly tantamount to its enforcement for our exclusion. Slaves are in 
the nature of capital, which is proverbially timid, and could not be carried in while there was 
the impending threat and danger of compulsory abolition. 

"But the discovery of the wonderful mines and the consequent amazing enhancement of the 
value of labor in California, increased daily the likelihood that slaves would be needed and 



11 

introduced in numbers sufficient to determine tlie choice of the people as to their institutions. 
Prom realizing this strong probability, we are elFectually precluded by the State constituiion of 
California. 

" Evasion of the just responsibility of encountering the pernicious free-soil doctrinrs, has 
involved in its unconstitutional usurpations, i^lungcd it into innumerable embarrassnipnis, and 
inflicted on the South foul wron^. And are these things to be cloaked under the ,s|ieciou.s plausi- 
bilities of respect for the people of the territories and iion intervention? Respixt for the rii^hts 
of the people in thousands of miles of vacant territory, where in fact there are no people, \s to 
justify the utter disre2:ard of the rights of the people of half the States of this Union, the .sole 
proprietors and sovereigns of the whole! Non-iniervention with the supporters of this Admin- 
istiation was not wont to be advocated or defended. But let that pnss. Properly understood, 
it could only contemplate that the citizens of all the Stales of the Union should lie equally free 
to enter and settle with their property on the common territories of the Union, — slaveholders 
and non-slaveholders to be on precisely the same footing of equality and right, and to be equally 
protected by the law and policy of the Government." 

The following are extracts from the speech and address of the Hon. 
Mr. BROwisr, of Mississippi : 

•'As I could respect the reckless and bold robber who, unmasked, presents his pistol and 
demands my money or my life, above the petty, but expert pickpocket, who looks complaisantly 
in my face while he steals my purse, — so can I respeit the dashing, an:.t dare-devi! impu.lence of 
the VVilmot proviso, which robs the South, and takes the responsibility, above the little, low, 
cunning, slight-of-hand scheme, which robs us just as effectually, and leaves us wondering how 
the trick was performed. 

" My own opinion is this : that we should resist the introduction of California as a State, 
and resist it succes-falbj; resist it by our votes first, and lastly by other means. JVe can, at least, 
force an mljournment without her adinissio7i. This being done, we are safe. The southern 
States, in convention at Nashville, will device means for vindicating their rights. I do not 
know what these means xvill be, but I know what they may be, and with propriety and safety. 
They may be to carry slaves into all of southern California, as the property of sovereign States, 
and there hold them, as we have a right to do; and, if molested, defend them, as is both our 
right and duty. 

" We ask you to give us our rights by non-intervention; if you refuse, I am for taking them 

by ARMED OCCUPATION." 

The following remarks were made by the Hon. Mr. Clingman, of 
North Carolina: 

" I may remark further, that but for the anti-sIaBery agilnlion, slaveholders would have carried 
their rifgrocs into the mines of California in such nninhers, that I have no doubt but that the majorily 
there would have made it a slaveholdimr Stale. IVe have been deirrived of all chmce of </ih by the 
northern movements, and bi\ the wtlon of Ihii fli'iise, which hafi, by northern vote's, repeatedly, from 
time to lime, passed the I'f'ilmot proviso, so as in effect to exclude oar instilulion, loilhout the actual 
passage of a law for Ihal purpose.'" 

I might go on, Mr. Chairman, with extracts like these to an indefi- 
nite extent, but I will only add a single one from a speech delivered in. 
the Senate bv the Hon. Mr. Mason, of Virfrinia: 

" Sir, the point of division between the States where slavery exists, and the States where 
slavery does not exist, is this: We claim, under the Constitution, a right in law, lor all or any 
of our citizens to go into any territory belonging to the United States^ with all or any of their 
property, and to reside there, and to enjoy it as their property, without molestation or hindiance, 
under the protection of the Constitution, so long as it remains a territory. We hold ihal a terri- 
tory is, in the terms of the Constitution, ' the property of all the United States;' and so long 
as the southern States, where slavery exists, are constituents of these United States, they have 
the right to go into that territory, to reside there with their property, and to enjoy it under the 
protection of the Constitution. That is the right, clearly, and I hope distinctly, defined upon 
the part of the South, so far as I understand it. 

" We have heard here from various quarters, and from high quarters, and repeated on all 
hands — repeated here again to-day by the honorable Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Shields,] that 
there is a law of nature which excludes the southern people from every portion of the State of 
California. I know of no such law of nature — none wh.Htever; but I do know the contrary, that 
if California had been organized with a territorial form of government only, and for which, at 
the last two sessions of Congress, she has obtained the entire southern vote, the .eople ot the 
southern States would have gone there freely, and have taken their slaves there in great num- 
bers. They would have done so because the value of the labor of that class would have been 
augmented to them many hundred fold. Why, in the debates which took place in the conven- 
tion in California which formed the constitution, a calculation was gone into with reference to 
the value of the labor of this class of people, showing that it would be increased to such an ex- 



12 

tent in the mines of Ca'ifornia that they could not be kept out. It was agreed that the'ahor of a 
slave in any one of the States from which they woiiM be taken was not worth more than one hun- 
dred or one hundred and fifty dolUrs a year, and that in California it would be worth from 
four to six thousand dollars." 

Mr. Chairman, if this is not a triumphant refutation of the pretence that 
it is not necessaiy to exchide slavery by positive enactment, because 
the laws of the climate or the laws of the country exclude it, I know 
not what proof would be necessary; and yet, sir, we are asked to listen 
to the syren song of non-intervention! Non-intervention! Let not 
him who regards the dignity of free labor be ensnared by it, for it 
is the cry of " peace ! peace ! when there is no peace." Mr. Chairman, 
if the supporters of the " Wilmot proviso," in the last Congress, among 
whom I am proud to be numbered, needed any other vindication from 
the attacks which were made upon them, except the approval of their 
own consciences, for so strenuously insisting upon it, it is furnished in 
these extracts which I have read. 

" If California had been organized wVh a territorial form of government only, and for which, at the 
last two sessions of Congress she has obtained the entire soulheim vole, the people of the southern 
States looiUd have gone, there freely, and have taken their slaves there, in great numbers." 

This is the emphatic a.nd authoritative language of the distinguished 
Senator from Virginia. Sir, the meji who made determined and effectual 
resistance to the "Clayton compromise," the "Walker compromise," 
and all the other compromises, by which it was intended to open a great 
slave market on the shores of the Pacific, need no higher encomium; 
and the m^/i who wish to place a barrier against its onward march 
through New Mexico to the southern extremity of North America, need 
no higher incentive for opposition to the ^'scheme of fiaafication" the 
^^plati of adjustment,''^ which has recently been so im]:)osingly ushered by 
the fomous comtnittee of thirteen. Mr. Chairman, I have hitherto spoken 
of the change which has taken place in the South in relation to slavery. 
I have shown that while the statesmen who have passed off the stage 
deplored its existence, and contemplated its speedy extinction, the pub- 
lic men of the present day regard it as a proper relation between labor 
and capital, "a bles.sing to the master, and a blessing to the slave;" and 
I have also shown that the diplomatic and legislative powers of this 
Government have been wielded for the purpose of strengthening and 
perpetuating it. In addition to all this, a new element has been brought 
to its aid. This question has been caught up by southern politicians, 
and held out as a' bait to tempt the ambition of northern men. The 
great Democratic party of the country, the party which professes to be 
the advocate of the largest liberty, the friend of perfect equality, the 
opponent of all exclusive and separate privileges — the hberal party, the 
party of progress and reform — the party which can sympathize for the 
wrongs of suffering Ireland, which can denounce the cruelties of Austrian 
oppression, which congratulates revolutionary Europe in every effort to 
throw off the yoke of bondage — the party which has aimed to give the 
ftillest extent of freedom to man — has been made, or sought to be made, 
the instrument for converting the free territory we have acquired, and 
which should be consecrated to free labor, into the abode of slavery. 
Whether the secret negotiations to which I have referred, and to which 
publicity had not been given, had any influence upon the Baltimore 
Convention of 1844, 1 am unable to say; but when the new Administra- 



13 

lioix asked from Congress an appropriation of two millions for tlie pur- 
pose of acquiring territoiy, and the condition was proposed that it should 
not be changed from a land of freedom to a land of slaves, it was coldly 
received, and the Union newspaper, the organ here, was made to say, 
"it is no recommendation, as a friend of the Administration, to be the 
friend of the Wilmot proviso." This significant hint was soon under- 
stood by the swai^ms of men who live by official patronage, and by a 
press which was largety dependent upon Government favor for support. 
Mr. Chairman, it is veiy well known, that to all the leading measures 
of the last Administration, I gave a cordial and hearty support. Its 
liberal system of finance, which removed, in a great degree, the restric- 
tions upon commerce — its admirable system for the collection and safe 
keeping of the pubhc revenues — its warehouse system, and the able man- 
ner in which the war with Mexico was conducted — were measures which 
received the approval of my judgment, as they were sanctioned by a 
large majority of the country ; but I think I do it no injustice when I 
say, that its whole power and patronage were employed to prevent the 
application of the ordinance of Jefferson to the Oregon and JNIexican 
territories, and that its official influence was exerted to crush some of 
the purest and best Democrats in the land, simply because they were 
the advocates of the cause of freedom. As the National Convention for 
]S48 approached, a new test was sought to be intei^polated into the 
Democratic creed. On the 10th of December. 1847, the Legislature 
of Alabama, being about to elect a United States Senator, addressed a 
number of interogatories to Mr. King and Mr. Dixon H. Lewis, who 
were candidates for the place, among which w^as one asking them if 
they would support the nominee of the Baltimore Convention for the 
office of President. To this interrogatory Mr. King replied: 

" I will pledge myself to sustain the Democratic nominees of a National Convention for Presi- 
dent a^'.d Vice President, provided they are opposed lo the Wilmot proviso, or any interferfnce by 
th : General Government with the question of slavery as it exists in the southern States." 

Mr. Lewis replied: 

" Without especial preference for any individual, if I were to indicate a choice for President, 
it would be in favor of the soundest Democrat from the free States, taking the highest, boldest, and 
inost decided ground against the Wilmot proviso." 

On the 22d of December of the same year, the State Convention 
of Georgia selected her delegates to the National Convention, and passed 
the following resolutions : 

" R'solved, That the Democratic party of Georgia will support no man for the office of Presi- 
dent or Vice Presi Je.U, who shall not have clearly and unequivocally declared their opposition 
to ihe principles of the Wilmot proviso. 

" Resiived, That it is the constitutional ri»ht of every citizen to remove and settle with his 
property into any of the territories of the United States." 

Similar resolutions were soon after passed by the States of Virginia, 
Alabama, and Florida, — one of which declared, ^^that vnder no ■political 
necessity xvhatever''' would they support any man opposed to the.extension 
of slavery. Mr. Buchanan, in his celebrated Berks county letter, had 
already yielded to the demands of the South. Genend Cass was known 
to have favored the two miUion bill, which passed the House with the 
Wilmot proviso, and to have expressed his regret at its defeat by a 
protracted debate in the Senate. At the next session he contented him- 
self with voting against the proviso, on the ground of its being inappro- 
priately appUed to a w^ar bill; but he wrote a private letter to one ol liis 



14 

constituents which, afterwards found its way into the pubhc prints, in 
which he declared that its passage would be "-death to the war, and death 
to the Democratic party.'" On the 31st of December, 1S47, there ap- 
peared in the Union newspaper in this city, the celebrated "Nicholson 
letter," in which he took ground against both the constitutionality and 
expediency of applying the provisions of the ordinance to the 4Dills for 
the government of the Territories. I mention this remarkable coinci- 
dence of dates, without the least intention of calling in question the 
sincerity of the distinguished Senator from Michigan, but for the purpose 
of corroborating his own statement, " That a great change had' been 
going on in the pubhc mind, his own as well as others." The Baltimore 
Convention met. The delegates from the free States submitted, without 
a murmur, to the degrading conditions imposed upon them by the South, 
and General Cass was nominated. The people of Michigan were dumb- 
founded with horror at the reception of the " Nicholson letter." General 
Cass had been sixteen years Governor of the Territory of Michigan. 
Yetnotwithstanding the prosperity of the State was greaxly indebted to 
the ineffaceable marks of the wisdom and foresight of his administration, 
notwithstnnding his great and well-deserved personal popularity, and 
the efforts of his friends, he was left by the people at the election in a 
minority of 3,642 of the popular vote ; and with the single exception of the 
State of New Hampshire, he failed to obtain a majority of the votes ol 
either of the free States; and at a time when every measure of the Dem- 
ocratic party was in full and successful operation, with an overflowing 
Treasury, and our country in a state of unexampled prosperity, we were 
beaten. Mr. Chairman, others may speculate as to the causes of thai 
defeat; I liave no hesitation in ascribing to that fatal "Nicholson letter," 
the doctrines of which were received by the people with such perfect 
loathing, the loss of the North, while the slaveholders of the South pre- 
ferred to vote for the owner of a sugar plantation, with three hund red 
negroes. This was a mortifying defeat ; but it may well be borne, if it 
inculcates this useful lesson, that in this noon of the nineteenth century, 
when the down-trodden nations of Europe are bursting the fetters of 
tyranny, which have bound them to the earth for ages — when every 
breeze from across the Atlantic wafts with it the cry of liberty and the 
inalienable rights of man from the uprising masses, — the northern states- 
man, to be successful, must prove true to the interests of the free labor 
which he represents, instead of becoming an accessory to the cupidity 
of the southern slaveholder, who would doom his fellow man to perpetual 
bondage. 

At the same election in Michigan, three members of Congress were 
chosen, pledged to oppose the extension of slaveiy, and also a large 
mnjority of tlie members of the Legislature, who, upon assembling in 
January, ceaffirmed the oft-expressed opinion of the people, that Con- 
gress had the constitutional power, and that it was their duty to execute 
it in the exclusion of slavery from the territories. Indeed, sir, I do not 
know of a public meeting, or of a convention, or a newspaper in the 
State, which has sustained the doctrines of that "letter." But, Mr. 
Chairman, it has been heralded by the Unioti newspaper, that the last 
Michigan Legislature has " repudiated the Wilmot proviso." Sir, they 
have done no such thing. They have, indeed, by a vote of 24 members 



15 

out of 66 — 20 being accidentalhj absent — passed a series of resolutions: 
but did they rescind the oft-expressed deliberate judgment of the people 
of Michigan, that the Constitution conferred the power upon Congress to 
prohibit slavery in the territories ? No, sir. On the contraiy, the popular 
branch had the impudence to reassert the doctrine. Did they rescind 
the resolution that it was the solemn duty of Congress so to prohibit by 
express enactment? No, sir. Did they rescind the resolution th;it it 
was the duty of Congress to break up the infamous traffic in human 
beings in the city of Washington, and in sight of the flag that floats over 
the Capitol? No, sir, they did no such thing. They dared to do no 
such thing. But they did pass a set of resolutions of the following 
import : " Whereas, the people of Michigan are opposed to the extension 
of slavery." Yes, sir, these are their very words, "opposed to the 
extension of slavery," therefore Resolved, That if our Senators are very 
anxious to relieve their NashviUe Convention friends from the ridiculous 
dilemma in which they find themselves placed, or if they really believe 
'that the Union will be broken into fragments' unless slavery is allowed 
to cross the Rio Grande, they are permitted, "by voice and vote," to do 
as they please. They may vote for the omnibus bill ; they may vote 
for a clause allowing the people themselves to settle the question of 
slavery, or they may vote for a clause prohibiting their action; they may 
vote for the Missouri compromise line, or vote against it, as shall best 
subserve the wishes of the South, and thereby save the Union. The 
State of Michigan, in consideration of the extraordinary concession made 
by the distinguished Senator from Mississippi, in consenting to post- 
pone the day for the dissolution of the Union, humbly presents this as 
her "peace offering." This, Mr. Chairman, is the substance of the 
resolutions which the Union, in pubhsliing, prefaced with the remark 
that " the language was as felicitous as the sentiments were praise- 
worthv." In the county of Lenawee, one of the most populous counties 
in the"^ district represented by my honorable friend, [Sir. Buell,] a 
Democratic Convention was held on the 13th of September, 1S49, pre- 
ceding the annual election, and on the 18th of April, 1850, another was 
held preceding the election of delegates to a Constitutional Convention. 
The resolutions passed at the two conventions of the same party were 
somewhat dissimilar, and I will read them : 

Resohaioiis of the Lenawee counhj Democratic ResohUions of the Lenawee countii Democratic 



Convention, Septemhei- I3th, 1849 
Resolced, That in common with all the free 
States of the Union, we are opposed to the in- 
stitution of slavery, beUeving it to be adverse to 



Convention Jlpril I8th, 1850. 
Resolved, That the efforts of our distinguished 
Setiator, General Lewis Cass, at the present ses- 
sion of Congress, to preserve the integiity and 



the great principles of human freedom, while harmony of our glorious Union, guidtd by a 
•■■ • • ^- - " wisdom and judgment, and enforced by an elo- 

quence rarely equalled, deserve the warmest 
thanks and acknowledgments of every Democrat 
and friend to his country, and are peculiarly 
gratifying to the Democracy of this county, who 
were ihelfirst to present his name as a candidate 
for the Presidency in 1843, in this State. 

Resolved, Tliat those Democrats in our Legis- 
lature who voted to tender their thanks to our 
Senators and Representatives in Congress for 
their efforts in behalf of the Union, and to re- 
lieve Gen. Cass from the necessity of resigning 



we are willing to yield to the southern States a 
their constitutional rights, and are opposed to 
any interference by Congress with the institu- 
tions of slavery in the southern States, where it 
now exists. 

Resolved, That we approve of the principles of 
the Jeffersonian ordinance, proposed in 1784, 
and adopted in 1787, and believe that the unex- 
ampled prosperity of the Northwest is mainly 
owing to the beneficial influences of its princi- 
ples. 

Resolved, That the act passed by Congress to 
organize the Territory of Oregon, in which is a 
clause to prohibit slavery or involuntary servi- 



at present, when his continued exertioi.s might 
be most required to promote the nation's be^t 



16 

tude except for crime in that territory, acknowl-jinterests, deserve our warmest aonrobation, and 
edged the power of Congress over the subject of shall receive our continued support. 
slavery in the territories of the Utiited States. 

Resolved, That we are in fnvorcf the exercise 
by the General Government of all their consti- 
tutional powers to prohibit the introduction of 
slavery into the territories of the United States, 
and to prevent its extension into those territories. 

The comment which I wish to append to the introduction of these 
resolutions is the significant fact, that at the election after the passage of 
the first, the county gave its usual Democratic majority, and that the 
ticket which was nominated ])y the Convention which passed the last, 
w^as beaten by an average majority of 480 votes. 

Mr. Chairman, this same Legislature of Michigan also unanimously 
passed resolutions in favor of the immediate and unconditional admission 
of the free State of California into the Union. For six months she has 
been knocking at the doors of Congress. The bill for admissioli has 
been retarded, and loaded down, and embarrassed, b}'- the votes of north- 
ern men. The California representatives would long ago have had their 
seats on this floor, and this new sister from the Pacific coast would have 
been welcomed among the constellation of States, if its pretended^orthern. 
friends had not been uniformly aiding by "their voices and^t^es," and 
cooperating with the avowed opponents of the measure. Sir, if a vote 
could have been obtained, no one doubts that California would long ago 
have been admitted, and no one, I think, need doubt the judgment of a 
discriminating people, in fixing the responsibihty for staving off and 
preventing that vote in the proper quarter. 

Mr. Chairman, aside from the denial of the constitutional power of 
Cono-ress to govern the territories contained in the Nicholson letter, and 
which seems to have found but few supporters, either North or South, a 
power which the distinguished Senator has recently claimed for Con- 
gress, outside of the Constitution, and in relation to which he said, "cer- 
tainly, it is the moral dtitij of any country holding distant possessions, to 
institute governments for the preservation of social order, and here, and 
here alone, is the foundation of government, as exercised by Congress," — 
there was one other position taken, from which I am bound to dissent. 
It is in these words : " The question that presents itself iS not a question 
of the increase, but of the diffusion of slaver}'- — whether its sphere be 
stationary or progressive, its amount will be the same. The rejection of 
this restriction will not add one to the class of servitude, nor will its 
adoption give freedom to a single being wdio is now placed therein ; the 
same numbers will be spread over greater territor}^, and so far as com- 
pression with greater abundance of the necessaries of hfe is an evil, so 
far will that evil be mitigated by transporting slaves to a new countiy 
and giving them a larger space to occupy." Now, sir, if I understand 
this proposition, it is an argument in favor of extending slavery into 
these new territories. If that be its intent and meaning, I can only say- 
that it contrasts strongly with the views and opinions of Jefferson, who 
labored so ardently to reclaim the Northwest Territory from its encroach- 
ments, with a view to its final extinction. But will the ^diffusion'' of 
slavery not increase it? There has been added in States to this Confed- 
eracy since its formation, exclusive of the territories, a milKon of square 
miles. The population of whites has increased from three to twenty 



17 

millions, and of slaves from half a million to three millions. Now, sir, docs 
any man believe that this unexampled increase in population, whether of 
slave or free, if they had been confined to the original States, would 
have taken place ? No, sir, this continual assertion of the right to carry 
their property into the new territories, is to gain new markets for the 
sale of slaves. The honorable gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Meade,] 
in a recently published speech, says, "Virginia has a slave population 
of near half a million, whose value is chiefly dependent on southern 
demand." The recent rise in cotton is said to have increased greatly the 
price and demand for negroes; and the North Carohman, published at 
Fayette ville, says that the number passing through Wilmington for the 
Charleston market averages twenty-five a day! This inhuman and 
barbarous traffic, the contemplation of which elicited from Jefferson the 
.exclamation that "he trembled for his country when he reflected that 
God was just, and that his justice would not sleep forever," and which 
Lord Brougham, in the British Parhament, characterized as "one of the 
most execrable crimes (for he would not designate it by the honorable 
name of traffic) that could disgrace a people, the being engaged in the 
sale of our feU.ow creatures" — is increased by the '■'■diffusion'''' of slavery. 
And the same gentleman from Virginia, in view of the restriction, says: 
"If we intend to submit to the policy of confining the slaves to the pres- 
ent limits, we should commence forthtvith the work of gradual emanci- 
pation — it is an easier task for us than our children." The gendeman 
from Alabama [Mr. Hilliard] expressed the same opinion: "We 
must make up our minds either to resist the interdiction of the progress 
of slaveiy, or to submit to an organic change in our institutions." In 
these two short extracts the case is fairly stated : the "perpetuation of 
slaveiy by ''diffusion,'' or its "gradual emancipation" by confining it to 
its present limits. 

Mr. Chairman, the Canada thistle is anoxious and troublesome plant to 
the agriculturists of the North; its introduction upon the farm of the careful 
husbandman is considered a great evil; every portion of the {)remises is 
watched with the utmost care against its insidious approach, and the 
first plant that is discovered is immediately uprooted. If you were to 
ask the proprietor of the soil which he would prefer, a few scattering 
plants on one corner of the farm, or a general « diffusion' over the whole 
estate, I think there would be httle doubt as to the character of the 
answer. 

It has also been said, Mr. Chairman, that because Congress had not 
the power to establish slaveiy by law, therefore. Congress had no 
power to legislate in relation to slavery. Sir, slavery was never estab- 
Ushed either by the law of nature, or any other law. ^ It is the creature 
of force and wrong ; it was never laufidly introduced into any country — 
it found its way into every State of this Union by violence. I am cor- 
roborated in this statement by the honorable member from Tennessee, 
[INIr. Harkis,] an extract from whose speech contains these words: 

« A law creating slavery, is not to be found upon the statute books of a solitary State in this 
Union." 

It is a matter of great indifference to the slaveholder whether he car- 
ries his slaves into the territories by law or not, the only thing he dreads 
is a law of Congress to prevent it. Congress can neither estabhsh mail 



18 

robbery or piracy by law, but it can pass laws to prevent, and punish 

those offences. 

Mr. Chairman, a leading Democratic paper in Michigan, the "Detroit 

Free Press," in a recent editorial article commenting upon the action of 

Congress upon the territorial measures, utters the following sentiment: 

"The true plan, which ought to be adopted, would be the old Democratic one, for which we 
have always contended — that Congress should provide governments for the territories, saying 
nothing in them about slavery, but leaving to the people interested the regulation of that matter 
for themselves." 

Sir, it may be that this was intended for irony ; but if it was not, I do 

not think I use too strong language, when I characterize it as a gross 

attempt to practice upon the credulity of its readers; and that they may 

be enabled to form a proper estimate of the truth of the statement, I will 

show them what the ^^ true plan — the old Democratic plan for which we 

have always contended" — is. The first Congress that assembled after 

the adoption of the Constitution, on the 7th of August, 1789, passed an 

act confirming the ordinance of 1787, and orivinfr to it full force and 

validity. The purposes of this act clearly appear from the preamble, 

which is in these words: 

"Whereas, in order that the Ordinance of the United States, in Congress assembled, for the 
government of the territory northwest of the Ohio, may continae to have full force and effect, it is 
required that certain provisions should be made to adapt the same to the present Constitution 
of the United States— Be it enacted," &c. 

This act received the constitutional approval of Washington. Many 
of those who participated in its enactment had been members of the 
Convention that framed the Constitution, and, therefore, may be sup- 
posed to have understood its true intent and meaning. 

On the 7th of May, 1800, an act was passed for the organization of a 
territorial government for Indiana, and slavery expressly prohibited therein. 
This act was approved by John Adams. 

January 11th, 1805, the northern part of Indiana was erected into the 
Territory of Michigan, and slavery prohibited. February 3d, 1809, the 
Territory of Illinois was established, with the like jirohibition as to slavery. 
These two latter acts received the approval and signature of Thomas 
Jefferson. 

On the 20th of April, 1836, Wisconsin was organized as a territory, 
and slavery prohibited within its hmits. This act was approved by Gen- 
eral Jackson. 

The Territory of Iowa Avas established by act of Congress of the 12th 
of June, 1838, under the administration of Mr. Van Buren; and here, 
also, was slavery prohibited. 

On the 14th of August^ 1848, the Territory of Oregon was organized, 
which contained the same provision in the memorable and time-honored 
words, "there shall be ne\A\eY slavery nor involuntary servitude therein, ex- 
cept for the punishment ofcrime.''^ 

Here are a series of enactments, commencing with the ordinance of 
1787, which was confirmed by Congress in 1789, under the adminis- 
tration of Washington, down through the administrations of Adams, 
Jefferson, Jackson, Van Buren, and Polk, to the year 1848, when the 
last territorial government was organized, covering a period of more 
than half a century, in which this policy of restricting the spread of 
slavery was steadily pursued and enforced. The constitutionahty of 



19 

these enactments was not controverted at the time, nor has it ever since 
been called in question, until the southern test was made, that ^^ under no 
'political necessity whatever,''^ would the}^ support a man in favor of the 
ordinance. 

Not content with providing that slaveiy should never exist in any 
territory which was free from it at the time of its organization, Congress 
has from time to time regulated and restricted it in those territories 
where it had an actual existence. 

By the 7th section of the act organizing a territorial government for 
Mississippi, passed in 1798, the importation of slaves into said territoiy 
from any place without the United States was prohibited, under severe 
penalties. This was ten years before Congress had the power, under 
the Constitution, to prohibit the importation of slaves into the States. 

By act of the 26th of March, 1804, that part of Louisiana south of the 
Territory of Mississippi was organized into a territorial government, by 
the name of Orleans. By this act, the importation into said territoiy of 
slaves from abroad was prohibited, and also the importation of any slave 
from within the United States who should have been brought into the 
countiy since the 1st of May, 1798, or who should thereafter be brought 
into the United States. It further provided that no slave should be 
brought into said territoiy, except by a citizen of the United States, \yho 
should remove there for actual setdement, and who should at the time 
be the bona fide owner of such slave ; thus directly interdicting the 
domestic as well as the foreign slave trade in this Territoiy of Orleans. 
This act was approved by Jefferson. 

On the 6th of March, 1820, an act was passed "to authorize the people 
pie of INIissouri to form a constitution and State government, and for the 
admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the 
original States, and to lyrohihit slavery in certain territories^ 

By the Sth section of that act it was provided, " that in all that tern- 
tory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, 
which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north latitude, 
not included within the limits of the State contemplated by this act, 
slavery and involuntary servitude, othenvise than in the punishment of 
crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and 
the same is hereby, forever prohibited." 

This act, as also the ordinance of 1787, actually abolished slaveiy — 
a tiling we do not now propose to do. Slaveiy existed in parts of the 
northwest territoiT, and in Louisiana the law of slaveiy at the time of the 
cession from France covered the entire territoiy , from the Gulf of Mexico 
to the parallel of the fortv-ninth degree of north latitude, and west to 
the Rocky Mountains, the Missouri compromise was in harmony w^th 
the settled poHcy of our Government. It restricted and narrowed the 
limits of slavery. 

Thus, sir, commencing with the celebrated ordinance of '87, down to 
the year 1848, this Government has exercised full and exclusive juris- 
diction over the question of slavery in the territories. And yet the people 
of Michigan are to be told, that "the old Democratic plan" is, "to 
say nothing? about slaveiy in the teri-itories." Sir, this specious pretext 
of leaving to the people of the territories the regulation of that question, 
was never adopted. Sovereignty only appertains to organized States. 



20 

It is that power which prescribes laws, and to which it is required to 
yield obedience. This power no more resides in a territory, than it 
does in a county or a township in the State of Michigan ; the people in 
the smallest township might as well claim to make laws, as the people 
in a territory. They are high prerogatives, which, in the case of a town- 
ship, belong to the State ; in the case of a territory, they belong to the 
only sovereign, the United States. Nor, Mr. Chairman, was the remark 
of the distinguished Senator from Michigan, in his speech, in which he 
says, "all the territories have been governed upon this general principle 
of congressional jurisdiction, leaving to the 'people to be affected by them, 
the passage of laws suited to their condition" perfectly accurate. For 
eighteen years the people of the Territory of Michigan had neither a voice 
in the passage of laws, nor in the selection of the persons to administer 
them. For eight years out of the sixteen, of which the Senator himself 
was governor, he, in conjunction with three judges, (all of them holding 
their places without the constitutional authority, as he now admits,) 
arbitrarily imposed upon that people a code of laws, which extended 
down to the "private relations of husband and wife, parent and child," 
and in which the people had not a word to say. Fortunately for them, 
it was a mild and beneficient code, suited to their wants and condition. 
Fortunate was it also for them, that this neiv light, of the power of Con- 
gress only to legislate in relation to land in the territories had not broken 
upon them. Mr. Chairman, having shown satisfactorily, I trust, that in 
proposing to exclude slavery from these ne\v possessions acquired on 
our southwest border, we are only walking in the footsteps of the patriots 
and statesman who have preceded us, wdiy should we hesitate to act? 
Every southern man voted to exclude slavery from the Northwest Ter- 
ritor}^ Why should we linger against guarding the Southwest from 
its intrusion? Is it because we are alarmed at the threats for the disso- 
lution of the Union ? Was it to propagate human slavery that this Union 
was formed? If southern men should undertake to carry out their trea- 
sonable designs, what would be the record of their wrongs upon which 
they would ask the judgment of the world? "The people of the North 
refuse to acknowledge that 'slavery is a great blessing — a blessing to the 
master and a blessing to the slave' — and refuse to aid us in its extension ; 
therefore we declare this Union to be dissolved." This would be the 
summary of their wrongs — for this they would dissolve the Union. Sir, 
does it become northern statesmen to stand here trembling in their shoes 
at these croakings and bullying threats of desperate bravadoes? Are 
we, the representatives of the great free North so weak, or so timid as to 
be frightened from our principles and our purposes, because treason is 
rife in- the land? Shall we submit to slavery dictation? Shall we 
encourage them in their insolence, by publishing to the world our fears? 
No, sir, let the same spirit animate us which was so nobly expressed 
by General Cass two years ago, when our countrjr was involved in a 
foreign war, and the patriotism of our people was invoked to raise the 
men and the money to bring it to an honorable conclusion. Then he 
thus spoke: 

"Mr. President, it gives me great pain to hear any allusions to the dissolution of this Confeder- 
acy, and of all the places in this Republic, this high place should he the last, in which they should 
be expressed. The Constitulion is m no danger. It has survived many a shock, and it will sur- 
vive many more. It is yet fresh in its strength. No infirmity has come to tell us, that ita 



21 

dissolution is near. It is no longer an experiment, but experience— no longer a promise, but 
■performance. It has fulfilled all, and more than all its most sanguine advocates dared predict. 
It is at this moment stronger in the afTections of the American people, than at any other period 
of its existence. Like the clifl' uf eternal granite which overlooks the ocean, and drives back 
the ceaseless waves that assail its base, so will the Constitution resist the assault that may bg 
made upon it — come how or when or whence they may." 

These were the eloquent, courageous words of a statesman, which 
found a ready response in the hearts of the people. Thc}^ were uttered 
at a time when a strong party organization was opposed to the prosecution 
of the war. Now that tlie war is over, when nothing agitates the country 
but the simple question of organizing governments for the acquired country, 
cannot the Constitution stand as rude a shock? And was not the same 
distinguished Senator frightened from his propriet}'", and does he not 
tamely surrender to the dictation of an insolent minority, when he writes 
for pubhcation, sentiments like the following? 

*' Whatever impressions may prevail elsewhere, I suppose there is no intelligent observer at 
the seat of Government who is not seriously disturbed at the present state of things. Whether 
the danger is greater or less, nearer or more remote, are questions abfiut which men may differ; 
but I know no lover of his country who does not view the crms as an alarming one, and does not 
see, in the signs of the times, the approach of one of those political convulsions which, if not 
averted by wise and timely measures, may be fatal to us, and to the cause of freedom throughout 
the world. 

" The Union is in danger ! The first step towards safety is, to believe that the danger exists; 
and when the watchman asks, ' What of tlie night?' he who does not sound the alarm, is neither 
true to his own duty, nor to the interests of those who have committed a part of the fortress of 
their liberty to his keeping." — February 13, 1850. 

Sir, in the days of Andrew Jackson this Union was ?-caUif in danger. 
Then a sovereign State threatened to nullify the laws, and prepared to 
carry that threat into execution. But the brave old soldier, who had 
met the enemies of his countiy, and saved the beauty and booty of New 
Orleans, nothing daunted, issued his mandate: ^^ The Union — it must, 
and it shall he iwescrved!''^ Those memorable words produced a talis- 
manic effect; and the disturbers of the peace — the agitators, the nulli- 
fiers, quailed before the flash of his undaunted eye, and his imperious 
will. These same agitators — these same nullifiers — threaten the peace 
of the Union now. Shall we tamely surrender? Shall a slaveholding 
minority always control the destinies of this Repubhc ? Shall that cursed 
institution be permitted to march on, hke a resistless current, across the 
continent ? Do they not already possess much the larger and better por- 
tion of the soil of these States? The treasures oi freemen were fi'eely 
given to acquire this new territory — why should it not remain the abode 
of freemen ? The blood of freemen was freely poured out to enrich its 
soil — why should it be polluted with the sweat of the slave? 

Mr. Chairman, the Union is in no danger. The will of the majority 
must be obeyed ; the free soil of the country must be preserved as the 
inheritance of the free laborer and his children. If their Representa- 
tives are faithless to the trusts confided to them, the people must rally 
in their might, and assert their rights and their true dignity. Cahfornia — 
the free State of Cahfornia — mast be admitted; and if all other leaders 
desert us, the intrepid Benton is here — the same who grappled with, 
and triumphed over, the monster United States Bank ; the same who so 
perseveringly guarded the fame of Andrew Jackson, and carried the 
"expunging" resolutions; the same who labored so zealously to give the 
people a sound specie currency, by the passage of the gold bill; the 



22 

same who has always fearlessly denounced nullification, whenever it has 
shown its demon-head, as he does now, in the following extract: 

" The time has gone by for holiday professions in favor of the Union — the time has come for 
works. The condition of the country requires new tests for the Democratic [larty. Repudia- 
tion of the Nashville Convention — repudiation of nullification and disunion, as remedies for 
political evils — submission to the laws of the land until repealed by the people or invalidated by 
the Judiciary. These are the tests which the times require, and no communion with any one 
who will not adopt them and work up to them." 

' Mr. Chairman, a brighter day will soon dawn upon us. This deep- 
seated hostility, this desperate opposition to the admission of the free 
State of California, is one of the dying throes of the slave power. It 
has controlled the destiny of this country. It has dispensed its patron- 
age. It has grasped the executive, judicial, and diplomatic functions of 
this Government. Our northern politicians have bowed down before its 
shrine and worshipped ; and it has moulded them hke clay in the hands 
of the potter. But its dream of a great slave mart on the shores of the 
Pacific will never be realized — henceforth it is shorn of its power. The 
fiat of the people has gone forth. " No new slave territory, no new slave 
States," is the popular cry; and he lingers far behind the progressive 
spirit of the age who doubts its hteral fulfillment. Henceforth, as in Cah- 
fornia, new countries are to be seized and controlled by free labor, and 
its dignity will be asserted. Let us hope that slavery, the only stigma 
upon our great Republic, the living libel upon the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence, will gradually disappear, and that the day will soon come 
when the buying and selling of human beings will be known only like 
religious intolerance, or the burning of witches, or the African slave 
trade — among the things which an enlightened age condemns. 

Mr. Chairman, I have spoken frankly and earnestly the promptings of 
my judgment and my heart. If, upon this momentous question, it is my 
fortune to differ with others, I have no disposition to question the purity 
of their motives or the sincerity of their patriotism. Coming, as I do, 
from the laboring classes, I should have failed to discharge my whole 
duty if I had not spoken and acted, when I thought their interests in 
jeopardy. As the representative of free white laboring men, I 
mean to defend their rights. I have no desire for political preferment. 
I have no ambition Tor fame. I shall be content if I leave no stain upon 
my memory ; and if hereafter my descendants should, perchance, refer 
to the records of these proceedings, I trust it will inspire them with an 
honest pride, to be able to say "iie opiiosed the extension of slavery .'''' 



LbS20 



